Here in the real world, a "prequel" is still a sequel; it's just placed ahead of the others in chronology. But it still counts as an extension of the series.

But have fun with whatever exciting and new counting systems you and Psylockecolossus can come up with.

I wasn't using that counting method literally, it was an example. And another post goes over your head.

But still, there's a reason prequels are never numbered, if they were, they'd HAVE to be negative. You think First Class would EVER be called X-Men 4? Hell no.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrCosmic

And why is this the discussion? The OP was very explicitly in what he meant by #4 movie with lots and lots of examples. It's a legitimate question, even if you don't think it's important.

Exactly, it's like people want to rebel just because. Just answer the damn question the way the original poster wants it to be answered, is that so hard?

__________________

Quote:

"I knew there was something wrong, it just took a while to dawn on me, or maybe I was just afraid to think it, but you survived the destruction because you caused it. Raina wasn't the only one changed in there, and I'm pretty sure the DNA results that I'm running right now will confirm that there's nothing wrong with the data in my head Skye, there's something wrong with you."

Hey, whatever floats your boat, man. I don't really give a **** about this question or this thread, anyway, or whatever point is trying to be made by it.

All I know is that there are already four installments in the X-Men series, so X-Men wins. Whatever game of semantics you want to play after that, have at it. Peace, out.

I figured that was it, that you were trying to counter some point you thought the thread was making rather than simply answer the question. Too bad, could have been a fun discussion without you coming into to loudly and repeatedly not give a ****.

Sequel as applied to a work of literature is a modern usage, though. Yes it means "to follow" but it has been meant to mean a story that follows and continues another since the early 1500s. And for us here in this thread we are using the sense of "continue" to mean being set chronologically after another. The portmanteau "prequel" exists for a reason--to delineate stories created chronologically after another but set before them from stories created chronologically after another but set after them. If people didn't want to delineate between prequels and sequels based on their chronological order in a story, they wouldn't be using the word prequel! It exists for a reason. In fact, yet another term, interquel, has been coined for stories created chronologically after both sequels and prequels but set to take place in between them (The Clone Wars CGI cartoon, for instance, to use a Star Wars reference).

So, let's set semantics aside and go with what the topic creator wants to discuss, as set forth in the first post of the topic, which is a sequel set after three other movies in a storyline. We can call it that from now on--we'll use the acronym SSATOMIAS.

Anyway, I read yesterday that apparently The Wolverine is being set after X3, so it is presumably a SSATOMIAS.

EDIT: Let me put this another way--I could argue etymologically that the term "subway" is so vague it could be applied to numerous things. An underpass is a "subway". A tunnel through a mountain that has a road on top of it is a "subway". However, if someone had quite clearly laid out in context that they were talking about a series of tunnels under a city through which trains travel, it would seem quite pedantic for me to argue that a subway is any path that goes under another path.

I'll leave it to everyone to imagine what it would be like if, when people said "submarine", it conjured up every image from a fish to a sea sponge, or every man-made construct from a bathysphere to a diving suit. They're all "under the water", after all.

How do they explain Emma Frost being 12 in Origins: Wolverine which takes place in the late '70s when she's an adult in First Class which took place in the early '60s? How do they explain that Xavier is crippled in First Class which took place in the early '60s but walking around at the end of Origins: Wolverine which took place in the late '70s? How do they explain Havok being in his 20s in First Class which takes place in the early '60s when he's the younger brother of Cyclops who was only in his 30s which took place in modern day? How do they explain that Cyclops is 12 in Origins: Wolverine which took place in the late '70s when he's the older brother of Havok who is in his 20s in First Class which took place in the early '60s?

First Class is a reboot, in my opinion, regarding these inconsistencies, thus it can't count as the fourth movie. Origins has been retconned into oblivion.

I don't take that opinion, but it seems valid. It did do away with the continuity of XMWO, iirc. So it was, at least a partial reboot. If the DOFP storyline makes any changes to X-Men continuity, then it could be even further considered a reboot.

They can't seem to imagine anyone else in the role, I guess. It also only amounted to a cameo in that particular film. Now they're giving him a whole 'nother movie, though, but whether it will do something to tie in with First Class or not, I dunno. They have said it is going to be set after X3 but if it mentions nothing about X3 then who knows whether it fits that continuity or First Class.

Wouldn't it be batman and robin? since Alfred is the same thru all 4 there is continuity.

Marvel

__________________

Quote:

"I knew there was something wrong, it just took a while to dawn on me, or maybe I was just afraid to think it, but you survived the destruction because you caused it. Raina wasn't the only one changed in there, and I'm pretty sure the DNA results that I'm running right now will confirm that there's nothing wrong with the data in my head Skye, there's something wrong with you."

DOFP presents a really interesting query. Trying to label something that brings together sequel, spinoff and prequel elements all at once is silly. I wouldn't call it X-Men 4 by any means, though.

I think the most explicit answer will be Iron Man 4 circa 2016-2017. I have no idea who/what will be in it... will Downey take an extra film before his contract expires with Avengers 3? Will they put the focus on Rhodey Iron Man 2.0 style? We shall see.

It's a toss up. While most of us believe there won't be an Iron Man 4 in Phase 3, Shane Black may have just confirmed an IM4 for Phase 3 in his most recent interview. The only question now remains, will we see an actual X-Men 4 or Iron Man 4 first. My bets on X-Men 4 solely because I don't see an Iron Man 4 before 2017 and I'm sure we'll get the next X-Men in 2016.

DOFP presents a really interesting query. Trying to label something that brings together sequel, spinoff and prequel elements all at once is silly. I wouldn't call it X-Men 4 by any means, though.

Not really. Even if its brings together elements of the prequels (such as having the cast of First Class in this movie) and the spin-off Wolverine movie, DOFP is still a direct continuation from X-Men 3.

Not really. Even if its brings together elements of the prequels (such as having the cast of First Class in this movie) and the spin-off Wolverine movie, DOFP is still a direct continuation from X-Men 3.

Not necessarily true. While Singer said it is kind of a sequel to both X3 and X:FC, he never said exactly how he's going to do that. At the moment we don't know how he's doing this.

Not really. Even if its brings together elements of the prequels (such as having the cast of First Class in this movie) and the spin-off Wolverine movie, DOFP is still a direct continuation from X-Men 3.

Hmmm... somehow, jumping timelines and acting as a sequel to a prequel doesn't sound like a direct continuation. How do we know it's not a direct continuation of X:FC that brings together elements of the Wolverine movie and post-X3.

They've said it doesn't ignore X3, and it has most of the original cast back. I think that makes it X4. Some FC characters are in it, but that doesn't make it FC2. That just means they're including prequel characters.

They've said it doesn't ignore X3, and it has most of the original cast back. I think that makes it X4. Some FC characters are in it, but that doesn't make it FC2. That just means they're including prequel characters.

Actually when it was first announced Singer said it was the sequel to First Class. He said it's going to fix some of the continuity issues between the two but that's not the main focus of the film. He then went on in another interview to say it's both a sequel to First Class and the original trilogy. Does that make it X4, no it doesn't. They can't go X-Men 3>>X-Men: First Class>>X-Men: Days of Future Past then X-Men: First Class 3 and X-Men 5 it doesn't make sense.

The original cast of the X-Men trilogy is probably going to the past period (where the cast of First Class is set), so Days of Future Past is going to be the 4th chapter of their adventure as the X-Men. So that makes it X-Men 4. They are not showing events that already happened in the past. And its not a spin-off like The Wolverine where there's only 1 character from the original trilogy that is going to appear in the movie in a starring role. This isn't also a cross-over movie like The Avengers because First Class wasn't a separate series.

We can only really confirm that DOFp is X-Men 4 once we saw the movie, but I'm quite confident that DOFP is X-Men 4. Having half of the cast of X3 says it all for me.

“I’m taking into account every movie – I’m not just grabbing my first two movies and First Class and smashing them together. I’m taking into account the entire universe as it’s been laid out so far on the screen, and really respecting it and trying to work with that. People took things in various directions, so there’s some clean-up. But ultimately I’m not just ignoring them either"

That does not sound like this is strictly X4 with FC characters at all but something much bigger than that so saying it's X4 is inaccurate

^In that case, from the outside looking in anyway, he seems to be going in way over his head. Thus far, I love everything that Singer has done with the franchise, but he's treading dangerous ground here attempting to tie everything together. It may just prove to be too much for him.

Hopefully he succeeds, but unlike nearly every other upcoming CBM, the more I seem to hear about this film, the more I worry.